Copyright 1991 Adam Barnhart. All Rights Reserved. Fair use of this document.

The marriage between science and philosophy is clearly shown in the creation of the model for the development of human ethics. Human ethics are based on the concept of action within the group, as an ethical system cannot exist without something outside the individual which can be impacted. The concept of human ethics also entails the principle of altruistic behavior, which is a manner of conduct which benefits organisms other than the one performing the action, a type of behavior that can be expressed in a multitude of ways, motivated by a variety of causes. This activity can be seen very clearly in man and several other animals.¹

The behavior benefiting other members of a group is based on reciprocal altruism. Reciprocal altruism is a principle which is evident in animals other than man, indicating that its necessity in the promotion of the preservation of the species. The reciprocal altruism which is being selected is one in which the behavior of an individual benefits the environment that the individual is placed in, as well as the actor performing the action. Illustration of this can be seen in the group fighting of primates and, at a more basic level, the actions of cleaning fishes, which remove parasites from the systems of larger fishes.² This type of conduct proved to be the foundation for the more complex system of behavior inherent in human ethics.

A related concept is that of the "selfish gene," ³ which grows out of the "struggle for existence."⁴ The study of genetics has shown that the attributes resulting from genetic mutation, in conjunction with reproduction, are the primary force causing variety in the organisms. This variety creates a population of organisms that have different levels of suitability of their environment. Characteristics that are best suited to the environment are selected, as only surviving members of the population pool reproduce. This necessarily creates a statistical relationship between organisms. In any environment, only a limited number of organisms are able to survive and reproduce. In addition, each organism has a level of probability of survival, based on its level of adaptation to its environment. These two factors lead to the development of a need to beneficially interact with other organisms in that environment, in order to improve the chances of survival. In The Descent of Man, Darwin, shows this occurring among with the development of an increasing intelligence in man, stating:

If in each grade of society the members were divided into two equal bodies, the one including the intellectually superior and the other inferior, there can be little doubt that the former would succeed best in all occupations, and rear a greater number of children.⁵

The "selfish gene" within the context of the struggle for existence, indicates that the basis of reciprocal and inclusive fitness altruism is one which is beneficial for the survival of the individual organism, as well as the species as a whole. With the evolving human species existing in a social context, behavior which incorporates altruistic tendencies becomes more prevalent, with the symbiotic conduct being extended to an increasing amount of other, more foreign, animals. These tendencies form the starting point of a true ethical system.

For an ethical system to be extant, three basic criteria must be met. The first is that more than one option exists in the decision-making process. The second condition requires the ability to make a judgment on an ethical basis. The final tenet requires a freedom to make an ethical decision between the available options.⁶

The principles, which become firmly entrenched when viewed in the light of developing mental faculties, provide the prerequisites for a move from a more simply motivated altruist behavior to a more complex ethical one. Acting as catalysts to this change, in addition to the evolving brain, were factors such as the extended period of infancy and youth and the increase of interaction between members of the hominid groups. ⁷

Alterations in patterns of interaction play an important role in the development of ethics. In an environment of inclusive fitness, an animal will act to benefit only itself and others related to it. As more hominids began increased patterns of interaction with more surrounding members of their society, altruistic behavior becomes extended to more members of that society. With altruistic behavior necessarily being social, this increase is of paramount importance in the development of ethics, as an ethical system is one which applies in a more universal sense.

The development of larger cultural groups stems from these changes. These groups acted as unified members of a whole, sharing many of the basic elements of life. This common experience brought a unification of goals, and, hence, principles for achieving those goals, to each member of the group. This results in the first true opportunity to practice ethics in the sense of a conscious judgment being made by an individual within the context of a group.

The action of the members of the group becomes the major determinant with regard to the survival of the group. As a result, human cultural groups then become targets of selection. Members of the cultural group, given the alternatives of group success and individual success, are given the opportunity to practice ethical decisions that will impact the overall success of the group, making the selection process, facilitated by the struggle for existence, one which targets the groups involved, as well as the individuals. As a result, behaviors carried out by the individual which benefit the group in the struggle for existence will be selected and preserved for the greatest length of time.⁸

The ability to process these options in the new setting led man to develop an ethical system which is far more complex than the simpler process of reciprocal altruism. In this new context, behavior which benefited the group is maintained, and the concepts of ethical decision and ethical reward begin to develop.

The development of these concepts for individuals begin to take root during the process of selection. The basis of ethical decisions remains inclusive fitness altruism, as it provides the background necessary for all decision-making. Inclusive fitness enables the individual to act for its own success, a result which, under nearly all circumstances, is consonant with the principles of serving a group. However, combined with a more enlightened sense of self-interest, the utility of actions to the society emerges as a factor in individual development, as the individual is now able to make conscious decisions. These decisions have impact on self-preservation in the most direct sense, with the individual still being a target of selection. This principle is extended to the immediate surroundings in the body of inclusive fitness, as well as to the entire pattern of integration in the larger concept of reciprocal altruism.

The role of the individual in society becomes partially determined by the processes of natural selection, as only those who hold the characteristics most beneficial to the group are able to reproduce. These factors begin to evidence themselves as tendencies towards certain types of ethical behavior, much in the way that humans inherit the capacity for intelligence or artistic ability. These tendencies led to the further development and enhancement of the types of ethical behaviors that had been selected. The development of these grew more dominant, ultimately culminating in a totally revised environment for the development of humanity.

A type of moral education begins to take place in the new environment. The further emphasis of the goals of the new society was taking place in the time of parental care, which grows increasingly longer. Selected characteristics become prevalent within the society and cultural mores change dramatically. Thus, the entire system becomes more solidified and has its impact strengthened manifold.

For the individual, behavioral programs become increasingly learned, moving away from simple, instinctual reaction. The young mind of man and his ancestors is very receptive to new information, retaining a fairly large percentage of the information it receives for later use. This information is held onto strongly by the individual, "acquiring almost the nature of an instinct."⁹ As a result, the genetic selection of individuals who work well within the context of society finds itself amplified by the action of the ethical indoctrination of the young people within the social setting. Thus, the ethical teachings themselves become a selected behavior for members of the group.

These standards and behaviors hold a significant importance to the quality of life and the continues ability for an organism to live successfully. Thus, in order to maintain a degree of viability, the ethical system provided must provide a foundation that functions well as a general rule. However, the moral system must be tractable, in order to be visible within an environment that is constantly in flux. The changing conditions create needs that can, concomitantly, change dramatically. To deal with these changes, an adaptive nature becomes vital to the continues success of a group. The changing of environmental pressures insures a foundation that becomes solid in its general sense, but varies greatly in the manner in which it is applied in various times and places.

As a result of the paramount importance that ethical behavior begins to hold, the pursuit of exacting standards of correct moral behavior emerges. The history of humanity becomes colored with the difficulties of acting within correct moral standards and fitting into the society. The foundations of society develop as responses to moral dilemmas which have traditionally faced humanity.

The response to these questions in the face of science is dealt with in a multitude of ways. The work of Darwin in creating the new paradigm was done in an intellectual climate that was responded to in the work of John Stuart Mill, who lived between 1806 and 1873, as a contemporary to Darwin and a witness to his work. Mill's writings reflect an inclination towards a scientific methodology and his philosophy is one which reflects his environment, which establishes it as corresponding well within the paradigm established by Darwin, who worked in the same time and place.

Mill establishes the commonly accepted idea that a successful ethical system is one in which the survival of the human race is the primary goal. He accepts the principles of existence and rationality as being essentially axiomatic, much in the way the Rationalists before him ¹⁰ and the Objectivists following him ¹¹ did. In Mill's utilitarianism, the proper system of ethics entails recognition of life as the supreme value, and the mind as the means to achieve the proper means for promoting life.

The philosophy of John Stuart Mill, reflects an interest in the success of the whole. Its foundations can be found in Epicurean philosophy of the Hellenistic age, allowing for man to pursue happiness as its own end, in combination with principles of Stoicism and Christianity. ¹² The system is a teleological one, with its interest lying in the general welfare of the people, rather than the actions the people take. The system is based on the "greatest happiness principle"¹³ which states that the best course of action is the one which brings the greatest amount of good to the greatest number of people.

This creates a statistical relationship similar to the one involving the "selfish gene" and inclusive fitness concepts, as well as the ethical behavior derived from them. The philosophy of utilitarianism is largely one of enlightened self-interest, as people relate to the needs of themselves and those around the, as can be seen in Mill's statement:

The great majority of good actions are intended not for the benefit of the world, but for that of individuals, of which the good of their world is made up; and the thoughts of the most virtuous man need not on occasions travel beyond the particular persons concerned.¹⁴

The behavior espoused by utilitarianism is one which, additionally, holds human nature in high regard, as Mill believes that human nature, granted the opportunity to exercise true free will, will generally act in a manner that is beneficial to mankind. In addition, he supports the idea that in the face of need, man should act in a way that benefits the entirety of society. This also corresponds to the theory of ethical development proposed, as in the rare cases that the individual may choose to make a true sacrifice, those who do find their groups to be more likely to be selected in the struggle for existence within their environment. This behavior seems to intrinsically follow the concept of the greatest happiness, with one member of society performing an act of self-abnegation to benefit the needs of the larger body. However, Mill renounces the value of sacrifice without true necessity by stating:

The utilitarian morality does recognize in human beings the power of sacrificing their own greatest good for the good of others. In only refuses to admit that the sacrifice itself is good. A sacrifice which does not increase, or tend to increase, the sum total of happiness it considers as wasted.¹⁵

In his statement, it can be clearly seen that the source of altruism is the sense of a benefit to those in the environment of the individual, supporting the concepts of inclusive fitness and reciprocal altruism. The act of sacrifice itself is not valued intrinsically, as it, in Mill's philosophy, only has value as a means of averting greater conflicts with the general good. Within the biological model, this is expressed in the fact that an organism performing an act of self-abnegation, without proper necessity, only impinges upon the ability to reproduce, eliminating the chance for those who have such altruistic characteristics to continue a lineage for the trait.

In utilitarianism, the activity of humanity is the means to achieve success, both for the individual and the group. The value of an action is contingent upon its outcome in promotion the general welfare, as "the moral righteousness of an act is not itself an intrinsic value."¹⁶ The results of the action are viewed a posteriori, in a similar way to the process of natural selection, with the merits of an action being viewed in light of its relationship to the goal of successful adaptation to the environment that action takes place in.

The developmental nature of morality stems from the idea of environment, as explained by Mill. In his philosophy, human experience is a primary determinant in the discovery of actions are of the most utility to mankind. The ideas that "mankind have been learning by experience the tendencies of actions; on which experience all the prudence, as well as the morality of life, are dependent" is one which indicates both a direct link to the educational processes of morality, as well as intimating a less conscious form of development, indicating an inclination towards an evolutionary belief of ethics.

The development of proper conduct, in Mill's eyes, helps to profit the group the conduct is performed for. He seems to believe in the idea that human experience has led man to derive a system of behavior that is largely beneficial. His belief in the constant development of man indicates his inclination towards the idea that ethics is also moving along a path towards the goal of successful existence in a changing environment. He seem to have intuitively adopted some of the ideas of cultural selection and applied them to a principle of moral change, with the traits gradually becoming better adapted to the environment, as human experience facilitates more ethical knowledge and ability in application.

In the development of this knowledge, justice becomes a concept which is central to utilitarianism. It functions as the basis for ethical activity, laying the foundation for societal interaction and corresponding mores. The tenets of justice delineated by Mill establish an environment in which utility is legally expressed in the most effective way, in view of the rights Mill feels naturally belong to members of society.

The most important facet of justice in utilitarianism is liberty. No member of society should be denied anything which belongs to him by law. The most important of these area sense of freedom and a means to express himself. However, these needs must be expressed, legally, in a way that enables utility to be served. Mill proposed three levels of freedom for various means of expression to help insure this utility.¹⁷

The first of these is absolute freedom of thought. This freedom acts as a safeguard to the impingement of the general happiness, with mental exertion being, in and of itself, a means of achieving happiness. The freedom of thought enables man to take into account and respond to the things in his environment. The process of thinking is one which is vital to mankind, as, in addition to being a source of happiness and simple understanding, it promotes the adaptation necessary to continue the evolution of man's ethical system in situations that are often dangerous and rapidly changing.

The second of these is nearly total freedom of speech. The general well-being of man is served by this freedom, with the exception of scenarios where it will incite acts of violence or other such actions. When there fails to be an immediate risk of that nature, freedom of speech becomes an essential property of justice. Freedom of speech also creates more interaction within the social environment, which helps to further moral development, acting as a means between people to communicate ideas for consideration or instruction. Consideration of this type is equally important to the freedom of thought in facilitating the development and changes of ethical adaptation. The freedom of speech enables change to take place and, normally, promotes utility.

The final level of freedom is that of action. The freedom of action is similar to that of speech, insofar as it is a freedom which is total, provided it does not impede upon the rights of other people. However, a course of defined action is harmful to others much more often than that of speech. While action is necessary to the development of progress, it must first go through the stages of thought and speech, making action the final stage of development. The conceptualization of the three working together to promote a superior quality of life become clear when Mill declares:

That mankind are not infallible; that their truths, for the most part, are only half-truths; that unity of opinion, unless resulting from the fullest and freest comparison of opposite opinions, is not desirable, and diversity not an evil, but a good, until mankind are much more capable than at present of recognizing all sides of the truth, are principles applicable to men's modes of action, not less than to their opinions.¹⁸

This sense of the need for opposing forces is one again similar to the struggle for existence. It provides an evolutionary type of method for establishing a strong ethical system. The various opinions, in combination with the actions based on those opinions, provide a variety necessary to establish a standard of behavior which is best adapted to its environment. The struggle for the supremacy of a code of conduct is one in which each tenet is tested constantly within society, with those which best enable successful cohabitation remaining.

These selected standards relate to the second attempt of Mill regarding justice, that any member of society should enjoy rights to which he is morally entitled. Law should not infringe on the morality of society. Rather, morality should take precedence over other aspects of life. Justice is best served by the construction of laws which serve the general good, rather than by being merely expedient. In addition, a member of society who has had his rights infringed upon should hold the right to violate the principle in protest, being guaranteed that a competent member of the group making legal decisions will observe and review the objection to the impinging on human rights.

Paralleling this is the idea that justice is best served in developing a system of rewards and punishments which responds appropriately the actions of every member of society. Good and consistent behavior is facilitated by this, as an establishment of an unwavering code of justice provides man with a clear illustration of the relative merits of various actions in promoting a happy and efficacious society. Emphasized here are the two aspects of ethical behavior Ernst Mayr states are made possible by evolution, a selective system of rewards for actions which benefit society are rewarded and an environment where ethics becomes based on conscious judgment.¹⁹ The development of these cultural ethical traits form a foundation for the development of legal codes allowing for members of the group to be cognizant of the repercussions of the course of action taken, in light of available options.

Within this ideal of legality and justice lies the tenet of not violating an expectation of obligation made. This further establishes the sense of consistency which the selection of ideals of good behavior and conscious decision reifies. Any conscious movement towards an obligation of duty must be pursued unless it is "overruled by a stronger obligation of justice."²⁰ Behavior of this type finds its sanction in the other basic principles of utilitarianism and stands as an exemplar of the overall concept of the general happiness.

None of these facets of justice proves effective without the principle of impartiality being practiced throughout the entire system. Impartiality stands as means to achieve a higher degree of justice when implemented as a tool within the other principles entailed in the practice of justice. Every establishment concerned with the administration of justice is required, ethically, to practice the principle of impartiality.

Mill relates impartiality to the idea of equality, which he perceives as a component part of both the practice and conception of justice.²¹ In Mill's justice, no preference is made in the dispersion of justice, and he establishes that equality is "the dictate of justice,"²² dismissing the concept that whatever expediency that is served by inequality fails in counterbalancing the influence of equality in serving utility in aiding in every aspect of the development of successful justice.

This equality is tantamount to the sense of relative equality in nature. Success is essentially determined by the ability of the individual, or group to which the individual belongs, in surviving within the environment, providing an opportunity for reproduction. Impartiality and equality hold as the ethical exemplars of the manner in which a priori determinism fails to hold as an explanation for either the success or failure of the individual in the ethical environment, with the onus falling on the rational and free ethical decisions made by that individual.

The five factors of liberty, legality subordinated to morality, proper appropriation of rewards and punishments, honoring obligations to others, and impartiality, stand as the basis for a sense of justice which greatly assists in the ultimate serving of utility for mankind. This foundation facilitates the recognition of the correlation between objectified standards and the criteria the standards base themselves on.

Both ethics and justice are based on the statistical nature of the general good. The statistical relationship can be seen as stemming from a sort of a posteriori knowledge of the results of the action, as evolution is a predictive, non-deterministic process, with the model of ethical development showing the result of inclination working within the selection process. This inclination, as inferred from Mill's utilitarianism, is that of serving the general good of man. Thus, acts become measured in a statistical manner of the basis of their ability to serve the utility of man.

Concomitant to this is the assertion that the happiness of an individual is a primary criterion to be evaluated. Since evolution targets the individual,²³ the maximization of happiness becomes a key expression of this basic principle of evolution. This principle can then be extended to deal with the wider perspective of the consideration of all the members of the group, which is the ethical expression of the extension of the more basic reciprocal altruism.

Within the context of impartiality, these ideas evidence themselves as supporting the idea of utility serving everyone equally. Utility serves as the environment for ethical decisions based on the availability of alternatives, the ability to make ethical judgments, and the freedom to allow for the expression for these judgments to take place. These can be evaluated in an after-the-fact manner, viewing the degree to which they promote the general welfare of man. Utilitarianism proves a method of evaluating behavior that is consonant with the principles of the evolutionary model.

The evolutionary paradigm, created by Charles Darwin, is one which has been implemented in order to resolve many problems and questions. Among the most important of these questions are ethical questions, particularly those of the origin of human ethics and the manner in which they should be carried out. Human ethics can be seen to stem from a group selection process, emanating from the concepts of the struggle for existence and the doctrines of reciprocal and inclusive fitness altruism. This origin indicates the need for the development of an ethical system which serves its own nature, deals successfully with the role of the individual, and maintains a degree of adaptability. Upon taking the promotion of human survival as an axiom for an effective ethical system, the utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill supports the concepts of ethical evolution well. His concepts of the general good, justice, and the move to a statistical representation of good make his philosophy a successful synthesis between the worlds of biology and philosophy.

Notes:

1. Mayr, Ernst. Toward a New Philosophy of Biology. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, Massachusetts; 1988, p. 75.
2. Mayr, p. 75.
3. Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press; New York; 1976; p. 7.
4. Darwin, Charles (Edited by J.W. Burrow). The Origin of Species. Penguin Books, Ltd.; London, England; 1968. Originally Published in 1859, p. 114.
5. Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man (Second Edition). A.L. Burt Company; New York; 1871, p. 154.
6. Mayr, p. 77.
7. Mayr, p. 78.
8. Mayr, p. 80.
9. Darwin. The Descent of Man, p. 154.
10. Lavine, T.Z. From Socrates to Sartre: The Philosophic Quest. Bantam Books; New York; 1984, p. 97.
11. Rand, Ayn. Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology. The Objectivist, Inc.; New York, New York; 1961, p. 53.
12. Mill, John Stuart. From The Utilitarians. Dolphin Books; Garden City, New York; 1961, p. 407.
13. Mill. The Utilitarians, p. 408.
14. Mill, John Stuart (Edited by Marshall Cohen). The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill: Ethical, Political, and Religious. Random House; New York; 1961, p. 344.
15. Mill. The Utilitarians, p. 418.
16. Beauchamp, Tom L., and Walters, Leroy. Contemporary Issues in Bioethics. Wadsworth Publishing, Inc.; Belmont, California; 1978, p.15.
17. Mill. The Utilitarians, p. 532.
18. Mayr, p. 80.
19. Mill. The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill: Ethical, Political, and Religious, p. 374-375.
20. Mill. The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill: Ethical, Political, and Religious, p. 375.
21. Ibid.
22. Ibid.
23. Mayr, p. 79.

Cited Sources:

Beauchamp, Tom L., and Walters, Leroy. Contemporary Issues in Bioethics. Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc.; Belmont, California; 1978.

Bentham, Jeremy, and Mill, John Stuart. The Utilitarians. Dolphin Books; Garden City, New York; 1961.

Darwin, Charles (Edited by J.W. Burrow). The Origin of Species. Penguin Books, Ltd.; London, England; 1968. Originally Published in 1859.

Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man (Second Edition). A.L. Burt Company; New York; 1871.

Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press; New York; 1976.

Lavine, T.Z. From Socrates to Sartre: The Philosophic Quest. Bantam Books; New York; 1984.

Mayr, Ernst. Toward a New Philosophy of Biology. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, Massachusetts; 1988.

Mill, John Stuart (Edited by Marshall Cohen). The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill: Ethical, Political, and Religious. Random House; New York; 1961.

Rand, Ayn. Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology. The Objectivist, Inc.; New York, New York; 1961.

Consulted Sources:

Albee, Ernest. A History of English Utilitarianism. George Allen and Unwin, Ltd; London, England, 1901.

Agonito, Rosemary. History of Idea of Women: A Sourcebook. Putnam Press; New York; 1977.

Aristotle (Translated by Richard Hope). Metaphysics. University of Michigan Press; Ann Arbor, Michigan; 1960.

Asimov, Isaac. Change: 71 Glimpses of the Future. Houghton Mifflin Company; Boston, Massachusetts; 1981.

Bentham, Jeremy. The Principles of Morals and Legislation. Hafner Publishing Company, Inc.; New York, New York; 1948.

Bogen, Hans Joachim. Biology for the Modern Mind. Macmillan Company; New York; 1968.

Branden, Nathaniel. The Psychology of Self-Esteem: A New Concept of Man's Psychological Behavior. Nash Publishing; Los Angeles, California; 1969.

Bronowski, Jacob. The Ascent of Man. Little, Brown, and Company; Boston, Massachusetts; 1973.

Coon, Carlton. The Origin of Races. Alfred A Knopf; New York; 1968.

Cousins, Norman. The Good Inheritance. Coward-McCann, Inc.; New York; 1942.

Darwin, Charles (Edited by Bates, Marston, and Humphrey, Phillip). Darwin Reader. Charles Scribner's Sons; New York, New York; 1956.

Dawkins, Richard. The Blind Watchmaker. W.W. Norton and Company; New York; 1987.

Den Uyl, Douglas J., and Rasmussen, Douglas B. The Philosophic Thought of Ayn Rand. University of Illinois Press; Urbana, Illinois; 1984.

Eldredge, Niles. The Monkey Business: A Scientist Looks at Creationism. Washington Square Press; New York, New York; 1966.

Friedrich, Carl. Philosophy of Kant. Random House, Inc.; New York; 1947.

Fromm, Erich. Man for Himself. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston; New York; 1983.

Futuyma, Douglas. Science on Trial. Pantheon Books; New York, New York; 1983.

Gewirth, Alan. The Future of Ethics: The Moral Powers of Reason. Nous. 15-30.

Gould, Stephen Jay. The Flamingo's Smile: Reflections in Natural History. W.W. Norton and Company; New York; 1985.

Gould, Stephen Jay. Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes. W.W. Norton and Company; New York; 1983.

Gould, Stephen Jay. The Mismeasure of Man. W.W. Norton and Company; New York; 1981.

Gould, Stephen Jay. An Urchin in the Storm. W.W. Norton and Company; New York; 1987.

Gould, Stephen Jay. Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History. W.W. Norton and Company; New York; 1989.

Halevy, Elie. The Growth of Philosophic Radicalism. Beacon Press; Boston, Massachusetts; 1955.

Hardin, Russell. Hobbesian Political Order. Political Theory. 19:2, 156-180.

Hospers, John. Human Conduct: An Introduction to the Problems of Ethics. Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc.; New York; 1961. Howard, Ted, and Rifkin, Jeremy. Who Should Play God? Delacorte Press; New York, New York; 1977.

Hull, David. The Metaphysics of Evolution. The British Journal for the History of Science. 3:12, 309-337.

Hull, David. A Matter of Individuality. Philosophy of Science. 9:45, 335-360.

Hull, David. Philosophy of Biological Science. Prentice-Hall, Inc; Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey; 1974.

Huxley, Julian. Evolution: The Modern Synthesis. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.; New York; 1942.

Huxley, Julian, Hardy, A.C., and Ford, E.B. Evolution as a Process. George Allen and Unwin, Ltd.; London, England; 1954.

Kant, Immanuel (Translated by Norman Kent Smith). Critique of Pure Reason. Random House, Inc.; New York; 1958.

Kant, Immanuel (Translated by H.J. Paton). The Moral Law. Hutchinson and Company; London, England; 1942.

Kemeny, John. A Philosopher Looks At Science. D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.; Princeton, New Jersey; 1959.

Kitcher, Philip. A Priori Knowledge. The Philosophical Review. 1:89, 3-23.

Koestler, Arthur. The Case of the Midwife Toad. Random House; New York; 1971.

Laszlo, Ervin. Evolution: The New Paradigm. World Futures. 45, 151-160.

Leakey, Richard. The Making of Mankind. E.P. Dutton; New York; 1981.

Lehrman, Robert. Race, Evolution, and Mankind. Basic Books, Inc., Publishers; New York, New York; 1966.

Lewontin, R.C., Rose, Steven, and Kamin, Leon. Not in Our Genes. Pantheon Press; New York, New York; 1984.

Loewenberg, Bert. Charles Darwin: Evolution and Natural Selection. Beacon Press; Boston, Massachusetts; 1959.

Maritain, Jacques. Moral Philosophy. Charles Scribner's Sons; New York; 1964.

Mayr, Ernst. The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, Massachusetts; 1982.

Mill, John Stuart. Autobiography. Bobbs-Merrill Company; Indianapolis, Indiana; 1957.

Mill, John Stuart. Utilitarianism and Other Writings. Meridian Books; Cleveland, Ohio; 1962.

O' Neill, William. With Charity Towards None. Philosophical Library, Inc.; New York, New York; 1971.

Osborn, Henry. From the Greeks to Darwin. Charles Scribner's Sons; New York, New York; 1929.

Otsuka, Michael. The Paradox of Group Beneficience. Philosophy and Public Affairs. 20:2, 132-149.

Peikoff, Leonard. Ayn Rand: The Voice of Reason. New American Library; New York; 1988.

Pfeiffer, John. The Emergence of Man. Harper and Rowe; New York, New York; 1969.

Rand, Ayn. For the New Intellectual. The New American Library, Inc.; New York, New York; 1961.

Rensch, Bernhard. Biophilosophy. Columbia University Press; New York; 1971.

Ruse, Michael. Evolutionary Ethics: A Phoenix Arisen. Zygon. 1:21, 95-111. Ruse, Michael. Taking Darwin Seriously. Basil Blackwell, Ltd.; Oxford, England; 1986.

Ruse, Michael. But is it Science? Prometheus Books; Buffalo, New York; 1988.

Ruse, Michael. Philosophy of Biology Today. State University of New York Press; Albany, New York; 1988.

Simpson, George Gaylord. The Meaning of Evolution. Yale University Press; New Haven, Connecticut; 1967.

Sober, Elliott. Evolution, Population Thinking, and Essentialism. Philosophy of Science. 47, 350-383.

Spinoza, Benedict de (Edited by James Gutmann). Ethics and On the Improvement of the Understanding. Hafner Publishing Company; New York, New York; 1949.

Taylor, Gordon Rattray. The Great Evolution Mystery. Harper and Rowe; New York, New York; 1983.

West, Richard. The Strangeways of Bentham. Spectator. 264:8439, 20-22.

Wuketis, Franz. Darwinism: Still a Challenge to Philosophy. Zygon. 4:23, 455-467.